Over 650 snow records set in USA this week – another wonky surface station located

UPDATE : The NWS responds about the station issue, see below. – Anthony

Almost 60% of the contiguous USA covered in snow.

A volunteer walks along the practice green as snow falls during the Match Play Championship golf tournament, Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, in Marana, Ariz. Play was suspended. Photo: Ross Franklin – click for the story

While pundits spin attempts at linking snowfall in the Northeast USA to AGW, much like they do in the summer during heat waves, we find that Nature is just taunting them with snow as far south as the Mexican border in Arizona. And there is more to come, in the next week, we may see snow into Florida. During the last week, 652 new snow records were set in the CONUS as seen in the map below:

CONUS_Snow_records_2-23-13

The record furthest south, in Paradise, AZ, of 6.3 inches snowfall, beat the old 2 inch record going all the way back to 1896. Paradise, AZ is just 40 miles from the Mexican border. You can see all the snow records yourself here.

And according to the NOAA NOHRSC, 57.5% of the CONUS has snow cover.

nsm_depth_2013022205_National

I also had a look at temperature records this past week, where there were 92 new record low temperatures all the way into Florida, and only 20 new high temperature records set:

CONUS_High-low_records_1-23-13

One record in particular, at Jal, NM piqued my interest, because it was in the middle of a bunch of record low temperatures. Not only that, it beat the old record high in 1953 by quite a margin, besting it by 7 degrees:

Jal-NM_record_high

There are no new high temperature records anywhere close to this station, and it stands out like a sore thumb.The nearest official hourly reporting station in Wink, TX just 26 miles away, shows a high of only 62 on Friday February, 22nd according to this data from Weather Underground sourced from NWS:

Wink_TX_2-22-13

Source: http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KINK/2013/2/22/DailyHistory.html

Another station to the North, Hobbs, NM, 23 miles to the North, another official NOAA airport station, also shows no new record high on that day:

Hobbs_NM_2-22-13

Source: http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KHOB/2013/2/22/DailyHistory.html

The weather in the area that day was sunny, mild, breezy, and dry:

Hobbs_Wink_obs_2-22-13

Source: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/maf/version.php?site=MAF&issuedby=MAF&state=&product=RWR&format=CI&db=1&version=2013-02-23+00%3A02%3A12&go=Select

I had a strong hunch that this station in Jal, NM may have poor siting which contributed to the new record anomalously warm high on Friday, it turns out my hunch was correct.

According the NCDC metadata, the Jal station is a Class A station, meaning it is part of the climate monitoring network. While not part of the USHCN, it does serve as a station used for infill and pairwise comparisons when trying to homogenize the surface temperature record. The NCDC location metadata was a red flag to me: JAL POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHIN AND 2 MILES SE OF POSTOFFICE AT JAL NM

With just a little research, I was able to locate a photo of the station, courtesy of a survey page from New Mexico State University. The photo showed yet another parking lot weather station:

Jal-NM_station_photo1

In the photo above (which I have annotated) the Standard Rain Gauge is clearly visible and what looks like the MMTS temperature sensor shelter on a pole is in the distance near the front of the building. Such placements are typical, they try to get over grass where they can trench a cable back to a window or a wall opening to the display in the office.

A further check of metadata revealed the station is located at 32.1103 -103.1872, within the town according to NCDC metadata, and this Google Earth image:

Jal-NM_station_photo3

While that lat/lon puts the station in the parking lot, I note that typically most GPS readings in NCDC’s metadata are good to only about 100 feet. And sure enough, right where I suspected it was, was the telltale shadow of the MMTS shelter. Some annotation was added to the Google Earth image to help you visualize what I know from years of experience doing aerial station surveys.

Jal-NM_station_photo2

The photo above has an imaging date of 2/7/2011, seen in lower left – winter time, just slightly over a year ago. Click the image to enlarge it for a closer view.

So to summarize:

1. We have a new record high that is anomalously warm, 96 degrees F. No official nearby stations set any comparable high temperatures or  new temperature records in the same time frame. It appears all stations experienced similar warm dry breezy weather that day.

2. We have a NOAA temperature sensor a mere 7 feet from the sidewalk and 16 feet from a  large brick building (according to the ruler function in Google Earth and the photo from the NM State survey page).

3. We have a massive parking lot beyond that, and a major road just beyond the parking lot, plus a semicircular drive. Essentially the temperature sensor is surrounded with heat sinks.

4. We have a low albedo surface, dry brown grass, under the temperature sensor in February as evident in the Google Earth photo from a year ago, there’s no reason to suspect this year would be any different.

5. The station is located within the UHI bubble of the town.

So given the sunny dry weather with a lack of nearby comparable temperatures or new records, heat sinks all around, the parking lot, the building, the low albedo of dry grass under the sensor, it seems entirely likely to me that this is a false high temperature record.

I have sent a note to NWS in Midland Odessa to have them investigate.

Update: The original photo of Snow on cacti provided by Scrape TV stated on the Scrape TV article it was from 2013. Alert reader J Philip Peterson pointed out the photo they used was from 2007. I’ve updated the photo at the head of the story for accuracy. – Anthony

UPDATE2: 2/25/13 7AM PST Here is what the NWS Midland says in an email to me:

Anthony,

I did find that JALN5 COOP did erroneously report 96 degrees.  Unfortunately, the report did make it to a preliminary report OSOMAF.  I checked the database use to compile the record to see if the report was corrected, and the database had updated to show the data as missing.  This means that the official record will not include the bad report.

The last available RERMAF online is the latest one in our AWIPS system as well.  Historically, our site has only issued RER products for the MAF site (also the only site for which daily and monthly climate products are generated), though expansion in the future is possible.

Though the graphic in the article compares observations to the official record and appears to show a new record at Jal, reports gathered from COOP observers in real time should always be considered preliminary.  COOP observations are QC’d daily and at the end of the month before they are submitted as final.  Not all COOP sites are ideally sited, but the overriding problem with the Jal report appears to be sensor malfunction.  The high temperature data has been edited for bad data for several days.

The record should show that a new record has not been set at Jal.

Thanks for the heads-up and seeking clarification on this issue.

Regards,

Greg Jackson

Information Technology Officer

NWS Midland, TX

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

111 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 23, 2013 11:45 am

Record snow and record highs.
Baked Alaska!

Theo Goodwin
February 23, 2013 11:49 am

Paul Homewood says:
February 23, 2013 at 11:38 am
Theo Goodwin
“This is what I have been banging on about lately.
Total responsibility for climate records and historical data should be taken away from NCDC, and handed back to each State. It would be quite easy then for a few local operators to check every site, even with physical visits, to ensure that measurements are reliable, and that any adjustments to the historical record, including UHI, were made on the basis of known local information and experience.”
Keep banging. The Alarmists are bluffers. It is taking us a while to unpeel this particular onion. As the questions become more focused, Alarmists retreat.
Aberrant changes could be identified by computer quite easily. Just flag anything that goes up too high and maybe too quickly.

Man Bearpig
February 23, 2013 11:51 am
Gary Meyers in Ridgecrest, CA
February 23, 2013 12:01 pm

I thought that maybe Jal, NM (96F) was in a valley whereas Wink, TX (62F) was on top of a mountain. Jal, NM is at 3071 ft. abs, and Wink, TX is at 2792 ft. abs. Must be a typo!

Manfred
February 23, 2013 12:09 pm

RACookPE1978 says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:39 am
Manfred says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:27 am
World snow cover from sea ice page
http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/cryo_compare_small.jpg
An image for the northern hemisphere for 2/21/2008 (the February immediately after 2007-2008 low point in northern sea ice extents) would be more informative than that of February21 2007.
———————————————————–
Very little difference between 2007 and 2008.
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=02&fd=21&fy=2007&sm=02&sd=21&sy=2008
The sea ice anomaly is mostly gone by December.
Hence, I don’t think there is an effect of September sea ice on February snowfall. Jet stream position could be much more important.
http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=jetstream;sess=
(Does anybody know of a northern hemisphere jet stream map ?)

February 23, 2013 12:09 pm

The nearest official hourly reporting station in Wink, TX just 26 miles away, shows a high of only 62
Perhaps there is another reason the other reading was 69 and not 96. Did they get a new person who happened to be German? The reason I ask is that in German, the numbers are stated backwards compared to English, so sixty nine would be said as “nine and sixty”. So someone who may not have listened carefully may have wrongly written 96. Is this the case with other languages as well?

auto
February 23, 2013 12:45 pm

John Coleman says:
February 23, 2013 at 9:09 am
The record high red dots on the map in the San Diego/Orange County region of Southern California were not record highs, but record low maximums. No record high temperatures have occured in this area in February which is running about 4 degrees cooler than “normal” (which is actually the average of the last 30 years). We all know that the concept of “normal” is invalid in our constantly shifting climate.
================
John Coleman,
Thanks for your input.
Whilst I am happy to accept your take onyour local ‘normals’, here in the UK, I prefer –
“We all know that the concept of “normal” is magnificently mutable in our constantly shifting climate.”
Even our Met. Office is – I think – understanding that climate is not weather [and nor is vice versa accurate].
Just my local perspective: trust you accept this.
Auto

Luther Wu
February 23, 2013 12:46 pm

Werner Brozek says:
February 23, 2013 at 12:09 pm
The nearest official hourly reporting station in Wink, TX just 26 miles away, shows a high of only 62
Perhaps there is another reason the other reading was 69 and not 96. Did they get a new person who happened to be German? The reason I ask is that in German, the numbers are stated backwards compared to English, so sixty nine would be said as “nine and sixty”. So someone who may not have listened carefully may have wrongly written 96. Is this the case with other languages as well?
_______________________
Or it could be, that they are lying their butts off, just like “they”always do.

Martin Sorensen
February 23, 2013 1:02 pm

If the AGW folks are correct, I’ll buy some acreage near Fraser, Colorado and start growing oranges next year.

AndyG55
February 23, 2013 1:41 pm

The “above 80degN average temperature” has dropped to about 5C BELOW the 40 year average.
Last year (iirc) it was mostly well above the 40year average for the start of the year then sat on average during the northern summer.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2013.png

Editor
February 23, 2013 1:44 pm

Manfred says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:27 am

World snow cover from sea ice page
http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/cryo_compare_small.jpg

It’s not global – it’s not even the whole NH given the projection used for the image.
RACookPE1978 says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:39 am

An image for the northern hemisphere for 2/21/2008 (the February immediately after 2007-2008 low point in northern sea ice extents) would be more informative than that of February 21 2007.

When I set it up in 2009, I may have displayed image from two years before, but in 2010 switched to 2007 because that was the more interesting year and because the Anthony’s base page said 2007. I don’t have the access rights to change that. I figure seeing the run up to the (then) record ice melt season was more interesting than the recovery.
I don’t know if we should switch to 2012.

February 23, 2013 2:24 pm

Anthony, that record high minimum temp SW of Phoenix, looks like Maricopa, which I happened to check out recently. Its located in a field at an irrigation research center. As irrigation and changes in irrigation can cause temperature changes of the order of 1C to 2C. Any temperature data from that location is worthless for climatology purposes. And any temperature record is likely to be influenced by irrigation (changes).

John F. Hultquist
February 23, 2013 2:28 pm

JDN says:
February 23, 2013 at 11:34 am
@Anthony: “would you know how to get a hi-res picture of the snow on cactii? It’s nice. I’d like to make it a wallpaper for my computer.

I used Bing and searched for [ Arizona cactus snow ] with the images tab selected. The image at the top of this post claims a source of scrape-tv.com. That same image is in the middle of the 6th row down of my Bing search results. Click on the image. Then find the “more sizes” link. The lower right image is 1024 x 682. Click and save the image.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pamela Gray says:
February 23, 2013 at 10:15 am
“There are two more just as interesting. Pendleton (probably at the airport)”

That’s Meacham about noon and the previous reading was just 1 or 2 degrees less. I looked this morning and those were the last 2 hours I could find. Now they have moved on as only 7 days are shown. I don’t see how to access the earlier part of the day.
You must be close by – go check out what they have there.

Editor
February 23, 2013 2:31 pm

That suspicious record high in Maine is in Corinna, which is not too far from Bangor.
It looks like that site has major problems. Some points match fairly well, but some are way, way, off, like 59 on Feb 1 (Bangor Airport recorded 29). The low for the month so far are -5 and -7, believably close.
Data from http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=car

CORINNA (171628)
Observed Daily Data
Month: Feb 2013
Day   MaxT  MinT  AvgT   HDD   CDD   Pcpn  Snow  Snwg
 1      59    22  40.5    24     0   0.17   0.0     0
 2      32     6  19.0    46     0   0.00   0.0     0
 3      27     6  16.5    48     0   0.00   0.0     0
 4      35    12  23.5    41     0   0.00   0.0     0
 5      32     3  17.5    47     0   0.00   0.0     0
 6      28     5  16.5    48     0   0.01   0.3     0
 7      37     1  19.0    46     0      T   0.0     0
 8      16     0   8.0    57     0   0.01     M     M
 9      11     6   8.5    56     0   0.75  11.0    11
10      21    10  15.5    49     0   0.05   1.0    11
11      36    -5  15.5    49     0   0.00   0.0     8
12      36    16  26.0    39     0   0.29   2.0     9
13      46    34  40.0    25     0   0.00   0.0     7
14      47    26  36.5    28     0   0.00   0.0     6
15      45    19  32.0    33     0   0.00   0.0     6
16      49    31  40.0    25     0   0.01   0.5     6
17      38    22  30.0    35     0   0.02   0.5     6
18       M     M     M     M     M      M     M     M
19      37    10  23.5    41     0   0.00   0.0     5
20      49    36  42.5    22     0   0.76   0.0     4
21      46    23  34.5    30     0      T     T     4
22      44    22  33.0    32     0      T   0.0     4
BANGOR INTL AP (170355)
Observed Daily Data
Month: Feb 2013
Day   MaxT  MinT  AvgT   HDD   CDD   Pcpn  Snow  Snwg
 1      29    10  19.5    45     0   0.00   0.0     0
 2      22     6  14.0    51     0   0.00   0.0     0
 3      28    17  22.5    42     0      T     T     0
 4      27    10  18.5    46     0   0.00   0.0     0
 5      19     3  11.0    54     0   0.00   0.0     0
 6      32     7  19.5    45     0      T     T     T
 7      13     2   7.5    57     0   0.00   0.0     0
 8      14     2   8.0    57     0   0.05   3.3     0
 9      16     8  12.0    53     0   0.40  17.3    14
10      30    -2  14.0    51     0   0.01   0.1    21
11      36    -7  14.5    50     0   0.14   2.0    21
12      40    32  36.0    29     0   0.05     T    20
13      40    28  34.0    31     0   0.00   0.0    13
14      37    17  27.0    38     0   0.00   0.0    11
15      42    18  30.0    35     0   0.00   0.0    10
16      31    23  27.0    38     0   0.12   3.3     8
17      23    17  20.0    45     0   0.13   4.0    11
18      27    14  20.5    44     0   0.00   0.0    15
19      41    16  28.5    36     0   0.05     T    14
20      43    28  35.5    29     0   0.89     T     6
21      34    21  27.5    37     0      T     T     6

There is a Wunderground weather station in Corinna that reports 45 on the 15th (as does the NWS), and 33 on the 16th (31 in Bangor).
It looks like Corinna needs to be fixed, shutdown, or replaced with “Halfcrazy’s” home weather station.

DaveG
February 23, 2013 2:55 pm

The great snow job – Natures trick!

P Wilson
February 23, 2013 3:53 pm

In the UK here, it is much colder than average, and has been so for a while. Its normally around 8C, but the temperature won’t rise to more than 2C, during the day and has been like this most of January and February. It has been a harsh winter, and hey presto, we’re getting 50mph winds on top of the chill over the next few days.
I guess this is one of the aspects of mild winters associated with global warming

February 23, 2013 4:50 pm

That red spot in TN appears to be Waynesboro, and showing a new record of 78, beating the old of 76 back in 1964.

Editor
February 23, 2013 5:14 pm

The Corinna Maine NWS site appears to be at the north end of the town’s wastewater treatment plant, see both https://maps.google.com/maps?q=44.91972+n+69.24167+w and http://www.lagoonsonline.com/corinna-maine.htm .
The Google map page has low resolution compared to other areas in New England, but the coordinates may point at a Cotton shelter just north of the sewage lagoons. I suspect winter days with a light southerly wind can easily cause high temps that are 20 degrees above temperatures up wind of the lagoons.
What may be worse is that “treated wastewater is land applied using spray irrigation instead of being discharged to the river and, ultimately, Sebasticook Lake.” The spray system will elevate the temperature of large volumes of air in the sprayed area and the area downwind. I’m some of these plumes must reach the thermometer.
Next, I’ll dig up that site that has stations’ metadata history. Here are a couple good timeline events:

The Corinna Sewer District (CSD) POTW was constructed in 1969 to treat a combination of 85 percent industrial and 15 percent domestic wastewaters. All industrial wastewaters were contributed by the now defunct Eastland Woolen Mill.
When Corinna’s advanced wastewater treatment facility went on-line in September 2005, a key component of a multi-faceted plan to improve Sebasticook Lake quietly fell into place. No longer will treated and untreated wastewater feed algae blooms that have clouded the waters for decades.

Konrad.
February 23, 2013 5:20 pm

That white stuff in the photo? That’s not snow!
When the warm front of AGW (decades of propaganda and vilification) meets the cold front of science (radiative gases are critical for convective circulation and cooling of the troposphere) and is uplifted over a mountain of evidence (sceptics will never forgive and the Internet will never forget) it results in vast areas being covered in the rabid foam of warmists.
While this fluffy white material may look inviting, caution is advised. It can render common forms of lame stream media soggy and transparently biased, and prolonged exposure has been known to cause incurable leftardulence in humans.
/sarc

Jean Parisot
February 23, 2013 5:26 pm

Werner, “The reason I ask is that in German, the numbers are stated backwards compared to English, so sixty nine would be said as “nine and sixty”
Not in Texas German

RACookPE1978
Editor
February 23, 2013 5:53 pm

No. 96 degrees in February IS – even in Texas – a remarkable and notable event. Here, at 3300 feet elevation in the high plains in NM? No.
This cannot, thinking of excuses like water spray or cooling towers or anything else, be something other than error or thermometer failure.
But remember, Mosh claims it will be removed from the record.

February 23, 2013 6:12 pm

Steven Mosher [February 23, 2013 at 10:06 am ] says:
“with that large of a difference the raw data for the station would be flagged for “regional inconsistency” .so a few months from now folks will complain about raw data being thrown out because of QA. anyway it will be interesting to see what the Qa process outputs down the road when the data is checked before being used in homigenization.”

Excellent Steve. In one run-on sentence you manage to …
(A) Take a dump on a actual Scientific skepticism of an indisputable siting and UHI problem.
(B) Rationalize data tampering by Hansen and NASA by implying that all their self-serving adjustments are to solely remove bad station stiting and UHI.
(C) Re-educate everyone that continuous, untampered, single sited sources are bad and that homigenization[sic] is good.
Has anyone just graphed out the continuous pure untampered data from one single site? I mean a site with Scientific controls that didn’t move the location around over time and used the same equipment and methodology and didn’t have the surrounding locale morph from grass to concrete. I’d really like to know.
Ideally we should have lots of these for reference. And all single-sited graphs should show prominent markers that denote any possible changes that may affect results ( “thermometers changed here” or “parking lot created here” etc ). Then, following AGW legend, we should see single sites from higher latitudes with slightly greater increasing slope than lower latitudes. And that trend should match very tightly to sites along the same latitudes.
Has this been done yet? I guess not because Mosher, the lukewamies and the greater AGW cult would be prominently advertising it instead of pushing averaging averages in homigenization[sic].

February 23, 2013 6:31 pm

The other thing about that Waynesboro TN “record high” is their value of 78, while all the surrounding values are “record low max” values in the 30’s.
I can’t find a single station in that area of Tennessee that had temps above 40 for the 20th.
I’ll bet it’s a location thing, because according to the SurfaceStations gallery, the Waynesboro TN station appears to be at a water treatment plant.

Sad-But-True-Its-You
February 23, 2013 7:22 pm

Expect no response from NWS.
However, expect a visit from the FBI.
Your activity indicates, according to the FBI and DHS and White House, that YOU ARE Mujahedeen-Al Qaida and subject to White House ordered kill permission. The FBI visit will be to confirm that YOU are who YOU are, prior to the execution of the kill order.
Bon Voyage

R. Harwood
February 23, 2013 8:26 pm

It isn’t snowing here in Brisbane. That proves Man Made Global Warming is true.
We’re doomed.